Atheistic morality: Is harm to animals on a continuum with harm to humans?

[Cow Poke]

Actually...I neither like it nor dislike it. Just amazed that CP was missing the entire point of the offered analogy. The point was a person being asked a question they lacked the information to answer. Both CP's question and the Home Depot person shared that characteristic.

It was an overly simplistic analogy - the Home Depot answer could EASILY be obtained - not the question of "how much does it cost to save the planet, and how effective would that be". There is very simple methodology to solve the first, nobody can agree on the second.

[carpedm9587]

It was an overly simplistic analogy - the Home Depot answer could EASILY be obtained - not the question of "how much does it cost to save the planet, and how effective would that be". There is very simple methodology to solve the first, nobody can agree on the second.

Yes... I recognize that in one part of the analogy, the information was more easily accessible than the other. The point was that the Home Depot person could not answer the question without the information.

So we can simply use a slightly different analogy. It's like asking the Home Depot person, "how much will it cost to renovate my house?" Anyone who has done renovations knows that even the home owner cannot predict the costs until they open the walls and see the scope of the problem, and by the time they have done that, they have committed themselves to the renovation. And the Home Depot person does not have a prayer of answering the question.

[Sparko]

Actually...I neither like it nor dislike it. Just amazed that CP was missing the entire point of the offered analogy. The point was a person being asked a question they lacked the information to answer. Both CP's question and the Home Depot person shared that characteristic.

The trinity analogy simply failed because it was comparing apples to oranges. On the one hand is a claim that three distinct things can be simultaneously one thing. On the other hand was three (or more) translations of an original document being claimed to be one thing. They weren't. They are three (or more) translations with equal authority because they have been authenticated to accurately reflect the original.

I was thinking more along the lines of you picking apart Oxmix's analogies to avoid accepting his point as valid.

[carpedm9587]

I was thinking more along the lines of you picking apart Oxmix's analogies to avoid accepting his point as valid.

Jim never made a point...which was my point...

[Cow Poke]

Yes... I recognize that in one part of the analogy, the information was more easily accessible than the other. The point was that the Home Depot person could not answer the question without the information.

"more easily accessible"? By a factor of MEGA!!!!

So we can simply use a slightly different analogy. It's like asking the Home Depot person, "how much will it cost to renovate my house?" Anyone who has done renovations knows that even the home owner cannot predict the costs until they open the walls and see the scope of the problem, and by the time they have done that, they have committed themselves to the renovation. And the Home Depot person does not have a prayer of answering the question.

Except, of course, that Home Depot doesn't advertise themselves as being in the home renovation business - they can, however, give you a list of qualified local contractors who can give you that information.

[carpedm9587]

"more easily accessible"? By a factor of MEGA!!!!

Except, of course, that Home Depot doesn't advertise themselves as being in the home renovation business - they can, however, give you a list of qualified local contractors who can give you that information.

OK - I am chuckling now. Let's try this one. It's like asking a meteorologist, "where will that hurricane be in a week?" The meteorologist know what causes hurricanes, knows how they are influenced, and all of the science. But the complexity of the variables makes it essentially impossible for them to give any prediction that is accurate beyond a couple of days.

Better?

[Cow Poke]

OK - I am chuckling now.

That's why I'm here.

Let's try this one. It's like asking a meteorologist,

You mean, like my dad called them, a "weather guesser"?

"where will that hurricane be in a week?" The meteorologist know what causes hurricanes, knows how they are influenced, and all of the science. But the complexity of the variables makes it essentially impossible for them to give any prediction that is accurate beyond a couple of days.

Better?

Somewhat - but we're back to "I really don't know!", but on a much smaller scale, and much better history. Even a doofus like me can watch the weather radar and see all the various "educated guesses" at where the Hurricane will make landfall, and know the price of plywood is gonna skyrocket.

[carpedm9587]

That's why I'm here.

You mean, like my dad called them, a "weather guesser"?

Somewhat - but we're back to "I really don't know!", but on a much smaller scale, and much better history. Even a doofus like me can watch the weather radar and see all the various "educated guesses" at where the Hurricane will make landfall, and know the price of plywood is gonna skyrocket.

OK - we have now established that it is extremely likely that any analogy for "asking a question that the askee cannot possibly have the information to answer" is going to get picked apart.

So let's just go with the statement: you're asking a question that no one has adequate information to answer.

No analogy will suffice for you, so leave it at that.

[Cow Poke]

OK - we have now established that it is extremely likely that any analogy for "asking a question that the askee cannot possibly have the information to answer" is going to get picked apart.

So let's just go with the statement: you're asking a question that no one has adequate information to answer.

No analogy will suffice for you, so leave it at that.

Because there's simply no way to answer the questions "how much will it cost", and "what will it actually accomplish" when it comes to global warming climate change.

Meanwhile, a lot of us are simply being good stewards of the earth - not because of some scare mongering climate alarmists - but because it's simply the right thing to do.

[carpedm9587]

Because there's simply no way to answer the questions "how much will it cost", and "what will it actually accomplish" when it comes to global warming climate change.

Meanwhile, a lot of us are simply being good stewards of the earth - not because of some scare mongering climate alarmists - but because it's simply the right thing to do.

I think I said that - several times and in several ways: your question cannot be answered because no one has that information.

Then I went on to answer the other three questions, and got hand-waved away with "why don't you just say "I don't know?" In fact, I DO have an opinion about the other three questions, and my opinions were the ones I expressed. If you choose to discuss, I'm here. If you choose to hand-wave...

[Cow Poke]

I think I said that - several times and in several ways: your question cannot be answered because no one has that information.

So, why are analogies needed?

Then I went on to answer the other three questions, and got hand-waved away with "why don't you just say "I don't know?" In fact, I DO have an opinion about the other three questions, and my opinions were the ones I expressed. If you choose to discuss, I'm here. If you choose to hand-wave...

I'll have to look back - there have been a LOT of 1's and 0's flow across this medium since then.

[carpedm9587]

So, why are analogies needed?

The purpose of an analogy is to reinforce a concept. In your case, the effort was (apparently) largely wasted.

I'll have to look back - there have been a LOT of 1's and 0's flow across this medium since then.

At your leisure...

[Cow Poke]

The purpose of an analogy is to reinforce a concept. In your case, the effort was (apparently) largely wasted.

Because it simply came nowhere near answering the question any better than a straight up "there's really no way to know that". But, your effort is yours to waste!

[carpedm9587]

Because it simply came nowhere near answering the question any better than a straight up "there's really no way to know that". But, your effort is yours to waste!

Yes, it is. As with so many other things I do, I took the analogy and ran it by several other people (actually, six, so far). Not a single one of them (so far) misunderstood what the analogy was meant to convey.

I have to admit that I suspect you knew it as well...but I also have to admit that this makes me guilty of "reading your mind." So I will work to accept that you did not understand (or agree with) the point of the analogy and leave it at that.

[Cow Poke]

Yes, it is. As with so many other things I do, I took the analogy and ran it by several other people (actually, six, so far). Not a single one of them (so far) misunderstood what the analogy was meant to convey.

So, you shopped it to the choir, eh? I understand what it was "meant" to convey - it just fell so freakin' short it wasn't worth, in my opinion, considering!

I have to admit that I suspect you knew it as well...

Knew what as well?

but I also have to admit that this makes me guilty of "reading your mind." So I will work to accept that you did not understand (or agree with) the point of the analogy and leave it at that.

I don't know how I can be any more clear - let me type REALLY slowly (being facetious, you know)....


Never mind. I give up. Use whatever analogy you think makes whatever point you wish to make! I don't even care anymore.